Archive - packaging RSS Feed

I have seen the future of artisan wine, and it comes in a can

This may sound odd, but there is a link between packaging innovation and the increasing focus on biodynamics and ‘natural wine’, it just isn’t a simple one.

I am not suggesting that natural wine producers are better served choosing tetrapacks, paper bottles or aluminium cans for their wines (although they might), but sometimes the simplest way to define what you ARE about is to explain what you are NOT, after all:

  • a desert is that area where rain doesn’t fall
  • land is all that planet surface not covered by water
  • silence is the absence of sound

Wine in a can

Wine in a can

The wine trade expends a lot of effort arguing over differences between organic, biodynamic and natural wines for example, but almost none trying to find a way to differentiate between the real extremes of the wine market, namely between all of the above ‘artisan’ wines and those wines made to be sold in vast volumes through mass distribution channels such as supermarkets. In fact, you might be forgiven for thinking that the wine trade pretended that these wines in supermarkets didn’t even exist.

How do you explain to a consumer, in simple terms, what makes a bottle of Gallo Chardonnay different from a Gravner Ribolla Gialla? What ‘category’ of the market do they fall into? How is a consumer to differentiate between them when they both come in 75cl glass bottles, with similar corks and basic paper labels?  We need to develop a POSITIVE categorisation of these volume wines in order to have a meaningful conversation about the different needs and benefits of each part of the market.

ARTISANAL WINES

We may not all agree that ‘Natural’ is a fair category name, but we might all basically agree that the Gravner, and thousands of other small producers, are ‘Artisanal’ wines of some sort (read this great post by Robert Joseph on the subject of artist vs artisan).

Defining this is very hard however, so let’s take a “model” Artisan wine and say it probably comes from a small producer with their own vineyards, produced in limited quantities, that is different year on year, that has some taste characteristics that sets it apart from the vast majority of other wines (that not everyone will like) and is linked to the local ‘terroir‘, and that none of these factors are subject to change based on consumer feedback. Essentially, the wine is driven by the producer’s interpretation of what is ‘best’ from their vineyards, take it or leave it. Lots of wines will diverge on some of these points, but the general sense is there.

Artisanal wines are Producer driven (these are sometimes referred to as Terroir wines, but you still need a producer involved!)

The above is obviously not the driving motivation of the wines on offer in multiple grocers around the world. So, what do you call the rest?

  • Branded? No! Branding is very limited and not exclusive to this area.
  • Bulk? No, too negative and not necessarily true
  • Commodity? A good option, but it still implies a negative view of the factors.

How about a term like “Convenience Wines”?

CONVENIENCE WINES

The key features of these wines is that they are dependable, consistent, easy to drink, not overly challenging and widely available. All of these are driven by consumer demand, not producer preference. In simple terms, then, ‘Artisanal’ wines are wines that are NOT ‘Convenience’ wines.

Wine snobs may sneer at the quality of the “wine” in the bottle, but in fact this is only one aspect of the product that consumers are after. What’s the use of a “great” wine that I can’t afford, can’t find and may not even like? Great for whom?

Convenience wines are Consumer driven (to the extent that wine producers really understand their consumers).

The problem is that convenience wines still LOOK like artisanal wines.

If convenience is the key to this category of wine, then we have a reason to work to increase convenience by looking not just at wine styles, but also at packaging, branding & communication.

For example, glass bottles are great for longer term storage of wine, often benefitting artisanal wines. However, alternative packaging, such as bag-in-box, paper bottles or wine pouches for example, is logical in this context of convenience. It is potentially cheaper, easier to transport, more flexible for different drinking occasions, more flexible for branding and offers more communication opportunities. A wholesale move into alternatives would bring down their costs and remove a great deal of cost from the product, potentially meaning higher margins and/or cheaper products.

GreenBottle Paper Wine Bottle Alternative packaging has not really taken off in the UK compared to, for example, Scandinavia. One reason is that we treat ALL products of fermented grapes as “wine”, so the same communication rules are applied to all, resulting in an undifferentiated sea of “handmade” wines, from “historic vineyards“, made by “passionate” individuals that match any food you may choose to pair them with – whatever the truth might be.

If we were to find a way to promote the specific attributes of Convenience Wine and differentiate them visually, in terms of branding and communication as well as style, the wine retail market could be made more straightforward for the consumer, to everyone’s benefit. Wine drinkers might no longer be confused about the difference between a simple wine for weeknight supping, and the experience of an artisan wine for special occasions.

Isn’t it in the interests of both ends of the spectrum to come to an arrangement?

Sometimes, the worst of enemies can find common cause, and in this case it is to fight consumer confusion and indifference.

I’ll raise a can of wine to that!

Send me a wine postcard, I’m thirsty!

On the subject of wine innovation, one thing I forgot to post was a very quick video shot of Patrick Schmitt, Editor of The Drinks Business, sampling a new form of single-pour packaging, called OneGlass at the Fine Wine Fair.

The concept is a single pour of only 100ml, which is actually less than the smallest small glass of wine in the UK (currently 125ml), in a tear-away package that requires no corkscrew, and probably no glass!

The package is meant to look like a cardboard cut-out of a bottle, and  is so thin it could probably be taken for this. I imagine it would be really easy to take on travels, picnics, or even into those places that might usually frown on alcohol being consumed.

It’s almost like getting a wine postcard!

Interestingly, although I had no idea how long it had been in this package, nor how it had been handled, the wine was not tainted, and pretty much delivered what it promised – a drinkable Italian Sangiovese.

What more can you ask of a pack?

No idea how many producers will use these, nor how consumers will adapt to the package or the serving size, but it is certainly a brave concept.

Update: there is a limited amount of further information, and a lot of marketing spin, on the producer’s website at http://www.oneglass.it/:

The materials are apparently:

Oneglass, made of paper (75%), polyethylene (20%) and aluminium (5%), is a packaging that can either be entirely recycled or used as a bio-fuel.
In the former case, it is disposed of with waste paper and then its elements are separated and re-used, in their raw material state, respectively in the paper and plastic industry. As a bio-fuel, however, the paper is burned cleanly, the polyethylene is transformed into water vapour and carbon dioxide, while the aluminium becomes aluminium oxide, a substance that is then used to produce paper.  Two different ways for 100% recyclability.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Packaging: think green, but what about the wine?

I’ve often looked at innovations in wine packaging on the blog. There are two reasons for this:

  1. Innovations might appeal to the imagination of consumers and give them new reasons and opportunities to explore wine
  2. The wine business, like all others, needs to move with the times and ‘go green(er)’
  3. (and I quite like checking out new things .. oh, wait, that’s 3!)

When producers innovate with their packaging, moving away from heavy glass towards recyclable plastic or tetra-pack containers, or using new closures such as screwcaps or glass stoppers, we should applaud them for their concerns and their commitment.

But what about the effect on the wine?

Would you drink wine from a plastic bottle, can or carton?

Sample bottles

When it comes to some changes, such as the use of screwcaps instead of cork, research has already demonstrated the many potential benefits to the wine itself (in certain conditions). It has actually also helped to improve the cork business and fostered innovation there too.

However, plastic bottles are another issue, and one that has not been explored scientifically until now (that I know of).

So, why use ‘plastic’ bottles? The main arguments are:

  • They are MUCH lighter, so transport costs (and therefore the ‘carbon footprint‘ of the bottle) are much reduced
  • Certain plastics are less energy intensive to produce and recycle than glass
  • The demand for recycled green glass is not high (in UK), so let’s focus away from it
  • Usually used where wine is shipped “in bulk” to modern plants near where the wine will be bought, and not in inefficient small lots in wineries around the world
  • Better from a health & safety perspective (fewer bits of broken glass)

If all else was the same, then it would seem sensible, right?

The problem, all else does not seem to be exactly the same, but until now wine experts could be accused of being ‘snobbish’ about these bottles if they criticised them. However, the Institut des Sciences de la Vigne et du Vin (ISVV) in Bordeaux are conducting a long-term study on the effect of different wine containers on the same red & white wines.

The ISVV packaged the same wines in large & small bottles of glass, two types of plastic bottle (single PET and multi-layer PET) and also in a 3L Bag-in-Box. It is still early days, but there are some key and obvious results already after 12 months. If you are interested, the overview presentation is included here (but I list some key observations below)

For white wines, the cheapest and lightest plastic (single-layer PET) shows dramatic deterioration compared to glass. This is confirmed by the ISVV tasters observations and scientific analysis (and my own tasting). In fact, for the smallest bottles (187ml) the damage starts after only 3 months with oxygen levels increasing (oxidation) and the protective SO2 (sulphur dioxide) levels decreasing rapidly after 6 months. In summary, it would seem that these bottles are really not suitable for white wines for more than a few weeks, not months.

The situation is not much better for more expensive multi-layer PET or bag in box, but in any case there is a marked difference of all alternatives compared to glass.

The results are less conclusive for red wines – so far. It does look like a similar pattern will hold true, but it takes longer to be noticeable on red wines I guess.

The ISVV could not include other alternatives such as tetra-pack or wine pouches as they could not put the same wine they used in the study in these formats.

I can’t say any of these conclusions comes as a great surprise to me, but it is good to have some sort of numbers and ‘evidence’ to point to. Thinner plastic bottles that flex more are more likely to create opportunities for gasses to get in/out of the bottle, and wine is a very delicate product. Smaller bottles will suffer proportionally more as the volume of wine is smaller. A delicate white wine will suffer from oxidation faster than a more robust red.

So, should we simply stop experimenting and stick to glass?

Not at all. We need to continue to innovate and look for opportunities to make changes that will help consumers, be better for the environment and be better value for producers. However, the wine itself should not suffer.

So, next time you are shopping for wine (for example, see below for announcements by M&S), will you be tempted by the plastic bottle? What would make you try them?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Value of social media tools: a wine label example

Do you doubt the ability of Twitter to offer valuable and tangible business benefits? Then check out this little example.

I was at the Wines from Spain tasting today and I met Sarah. In fact we were already “friends” on twitter in our various alter-egos as @thirstforwine and @bottlegreenltd but had not really met in person. In any case, this twitter-enabled chat encouraged us to taste some of each others’ wines, and in the process I was asked what I thought of this label:

Knowing that such things are subjective, I thought I’d ask for wider input, so I shared the photo with twitter. Within 20 minutes, I had 15-20 responses to be able to gauge a more general view. In this case, unlike my own personal luke-warm stance, the response was overwhelmingly positive. Check out some of the reactions below (some are not included as the messages are private):

  1. JohnG
    quaffability @thirstforwine I do like. Very nicely executed. But my first reaction is that it’s vermouth, and I think that is a problem.
  2. ryanopaz
  3. Duarte Da Silva
    wineboffin I like it. RT @thirstforwine: http://twitpic.com/17xb65 – A new ‘retro’ Rioja label. What do you think? Like?
  4. Justin Liddle
  5. Fields Morris Verdin
  6. Champagne Warehouse
  7. Somewhere is Jeannie
  8. Joanna Harris
    joanna_h85 Love them!! RT @elliott_people: @thirstforwine – Bottlegreen are a great company, fab people and product!
  9. Golly Gumdrops
    GollyGD @thirstforwine It’s attractive, but at first glance I’d think – ooo is that Cafe Rouge’s new house wine label?
  10. Seven Springs Wine
    7SpringsWine @thirstforwine Yes I like it, different, standoutish on the shelves, looks a bit ‘devilish’. Tim
  11. Emma Blackmore
  12. Laura Lindsay
  13. Int'l Wine Challenge
  14. Àlex Duran
    AlexDuran_ Fine! RT: @thirstforwine: http://twitpic.com/17xb65 – A new ‘retro’ Rioja label. What do you think? Like?
  15. Richie Roberts
    RichieWine Great label… RT @thirstforwine: http://twitpic.com/17xb65 – A new ‘retro’ Rioja label. What do you think? Like? (via @wineboffin)
  16. Nayan Gowda
    vinosity @WineChallenge @thirstforwine I would say more Nouveau than Deco, but I also like it a lot.
  17. Chris Carter
    ccarter126 Classy RT @thirstforwine: http://twitpic.com/17xb65 – A new ‘retro’ Rioja label. What do you think? Like?

this quote was brought to you by quoteurl

How about that for value for business? With a properly planned out strategy for getting input and feedback from fans, friends and consumers in general, twitter and other social media tools can be very useful without being complicated or time-consuming. And they can be fun too!

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Would you like a dash of natamycin with that?

Chemicals
Image by stepbar via Flickr

“There could be a hint of natamycin in your wine.” Should you jump for joy, or jump away from the glass?

What if I told you there may be a trace of resveratrol? Drink up or Throw up?

What about knowing that isinglass, bentonite and copper sulphate had possibly been used in the making of your wine? Would that make you think: “Ooh! The wine maker cares that I get a fresh, clean and clear bottle every time, I’ll buy it!” or “Cripes! This wine is adulterated and manipulated. I couldn’t possibly drink this“?

There is a bit of a story brewing concerning the first item – Natamycin. This is a “fungicide and anti-microbial agent” that is allowed in some food stuffs in the EU, so at low doses is deemed to be fine for your health. Except, it is not listed as an allowable ingredient of wine, and therefore by (EU) definition is “banned”. It now appears that new testing methods, developed in Germany, are able to detect it, and they’ve identified it in several wines from Argentina, so the law says they cannot be sold.

[Poor Argentineans! Every time we think we might see more of their wines on sale, something happens to dash their hopes (I for one will continue to buy and drink Argentinean wines).]

So where does it come from and what does it mean? Who knows!?! (the source of this may be the real story)

I (personally) am going to operate on the assumption the ban is a mainly bureaucratic issue, that the substance is safe (at low levels) and that the issue will be more about wine making processes (and who might be cutting corners) rather than any real health scare.

But what about the bigger picture?

The bigger issue relates to those other items I mentioned. Which of these are good, and which are bad? Is the average consumer going to know? Or care?

There is a movement in the wine business that says that all wines should carry ingredient labelling (see what Bonny Doon are doing) just as most other food & drink products do. The question will be, will any consumer understand those ingredients, what they mean, and what the effects are? Are we defending the consumer, or simply confusing them “for their/our own good”?

Wine is a strange beast. In principle it is simple.

You take some grapes. You crush them. You let the yeast turn the sugar into alcohol. You filter the resulting alcoholic liquid and put it into bottles. You drink it.

Except the modern consumer demands certain reliable, high quality, clean wines, clear and without funny ‘floaty bits’, harmless or otherwise. Unfortunately, to achieve that, most wines go through a few processes that may leave mere ‘traces’, for which we need to invent new tests just to know they are there, of certain substances. Does the wine drinker need to know that? I’m not sure. As long as it is safe and fair (all wineries do more or less the same), is it necessary to know as long as it isn’t actually hidden?

I’m all for educating and informing consumers that want to know more, and 110% behind the idea of analysis to ensure what they drink is safe, but after that … ?

When the EU law changed and wines had to say “contains sulphites” I personally received several calls and emails from concerned consumers that their favourite tipple was now adulterated and “gave them headaches” when in fact nothing had changed, just the label.

In the near future, wine bottles will be “encouraged” (though I don’t think forced) to carry the pregnant-women-should-not-drink-alcohol symbol, a “responsible drinking” reminder, the usual legal source and content information, and the reminder that “this wine contains sulphites/sulfites”. I wonder how much further this will go, and whether, in a few years’ time, there will be any space left for the name of the wine maker and the name of the winery?

I hope that the reaction to this particular ‘event’ is not too bad for the Argentinean wine industry, and I also hope that common sense prevails. The rules in force are strong, the tests are in place and consumers are protected – let’s also hope that bureaucracy, even if well-intentioned, does not damage the wine industry for no particular gain.

What do you think? Would you like to see ALL ingredients listed on a wine label, or are you happy as things are? Do you trust the tests to keep you safe? What would you do with the information if it was provided? I look forward to hearing what you think of this issue

<end rant>

For the record:

  • resveratrol is, in theory, good – it is associated with positive effects on the heart … but there is the rest of the body to consider!
  • isinglass is used (by some) to get “bits” out of your wine, and all of it falls out of the wine (actually called ‘fining’) or is filtered out
  • bentonite is a clay that is a good filter for wine, nothing stays in the wine
  • copper sulphate is a bad substance on its own, but in tiny quantities can remove “off odours” (stinky, bad egg) from wines and is itself them removed too
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Page 1 of 3123»